VIRENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

Citation: [1955] 1 S.C.R. 415 · Decided: 29-04-1954 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MEHR CHAND MAHAJAN · Disposal: Case Allowed

Cited by 9 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

-
-
S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
415 
-r 
and with the help of the Chamba police seize the goods 
and attempt to take them to Jammu by a letter of 
request written by the District Magistrate of Jammu 
to the District Magistrate of Chamba. 
Lastly it was argued that the petitioner made an 
application under section 523, Criminal Procedure Code, 
to the magistrate 
and that application 
was 
dismissed 
_... and that a petition for revision against that order was 
still pending, and that when another remedy had been 
taken, article 226 could not be availed of. This con-
tention cannot be sustained, firstly in view of the fact 
that section 523 has no application to the facts 
and 
circumstances of this case, and the magistrate had no 
jurisdiction to return these goods to the petitioner. 
Secondly, the revision application has been dismissed 
.J( on the ground that there was no jurisdiction in this 
case to grant relief to the petitioner under section 523. 
For the reasons given above we allow this appeal, 
set aside the order of the Judicial Commissioner and 
direct an appropriate writ to issue directing the restora-
tion to the petitioner · of the goods seized by the police. 
The appellant will have his costs of the appeals and 
r 
those 
incurred 
by 
him m 
the Court of 
Judicial 
• Commissioner. 
Appeal allowed. 
VIRENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS 
1/. 
THE ST ATE OF UTT AR PRADESH. 
[MEHR 
CHAND 
MAHAJAN C.J., 
MuKHF.RJEA, VIVIAN 
BosE, BHAGWATI and VENKATARAMA AYYAR JJ.] 
Constitution of India, arts. 5, 19(f), 31(1), proviso to art. 131 
and 
art. 
363-Efject 
of 
the 
Constitution-Erst-while 
Indian 
States-Forming part of India-Any State 
Government-Whether 
can do anything in the nature of act of State-Sovereign-Whether 
can plead act of State against the citizen-Jagirs and Muafis 
by 
Rulers of Indian States having full autonomy and sovereignty prior 
.,..to the Constitution-Whether can be avoided afte1· the Constitution 
when not challenged up to the date of the Constitution-Courts-
furisdiction of-To question the accessions and such grants. 
--0 
1c54 
W azir C!zaiid 
v. 
Ti.e State of 
Himac.\al 
Pradesh. 
Mehr chand 
ilJahajan C. ]. 
1954 
April 29. 
1954 
V irendra Singh 
and Others 
v. 
The State of Ullar 
Pradesh. 
416 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1955] 
- .,. 
The petitioners 
were 
granted 
in 
January, 1948, 
Jagirs and 
Muafis by the Ruler of Sarila State in one village and by the Ruler 
of Charkhari State in three villages. In March, 1948, a Union of 35 
States including the States of Sarila and Charkhari was formed 
< 
into the United State of Vindhya Pradesh. 
The Vindhya Pradesh 
Government confirmed these grants in December, 1948, when its 
H.evenue Officers interfered with them 
questioning their validity. 
The integration of States ho\vever did not work well and the same 
.> 
35 
Rulers entered into an . agreement in December, 1949, and..,. 
dissolved the newly 
created State as from 
1st January, 1950, each' 
Ruler acceding to the 
Government of 
India all authority and 
jurisdiction in 
relation to 
the 
Government of 
that 
State, the 
Instrument being called the Vindhya Pradesh Merger agreement. 
Article VIII of the Instrument stated :-
-
"No enquiry 
shall be made by or under the authority of the 
Government of India, 
and no proceeding shall 
be 
taken in any 
Court against the 
Ruler 
of any covenanting State, whether in a 
personal capacity or 
otherwise 
in 
respect 
of anything 
done or._ 
omitted to be done 
by him or under his 
authority 
during the 
period of his administration 
of 
that State." 
The 
States which 
formed Vindhya Pradesh were transformed into a Chief Commis-
sioner's Province on 23rd January, 1950. The four villages (called 
enclaves) 
were taken out of this Province on 25th January, 1950, 
and absorbed into the United Provinces 
(now Uttar Pradesh) by 
an Order of the Governor-General under the provisions of the 
Government of India Act, 1935. 
The grant of the four villages 
made in favour of the petitioners in January, 1948, was revoked in --f 
August, 1952, by the Government of Uttar Pradesh in consultation 
with the Government of India, the operative part of the revocation 
order being made by the Governor of Uttar Pradesh. 
Held (i) that the petitioners were entitled to a writ under art. 
32(2) of the Constitution inasmuch as the order revoking the 
grant of Jagirs and Muafis in the four villages violated art. 31 (!) 
and art. 19(f) of the Constitution. 
(ii) No Stat

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.